I'm Holden MaGroin. Yes, keep the fee and lets help the taxpayers. Lets help the taxpayers more and remove the buses and checks for the private schools. As Liza says below, if you have to tell the kid no, it's all part of living in the real world.

Actually, the activity fee wasn't just for after-school activities; the music program is in school, for credit, and required the payment of the fee if you had any kids in the program (middle school age or older).

So, Liza et al, maybe we should just drop music, art, technology, phys ed, foreign languages and everything else in the curriculum that isn't about "EDUCATION" and simply offer reading, writing and artithmetic. Lets take it a step further, and only educate our students until 8th grade. That would save plenty on taxes for the "taxpayers" (I think you all forget that parents are taxpayers too), as we would need far fewer teachers and would provide the uneducated and one-dimensional work-force that some of you seem to think is the only obligation of "EUDCATION."

Sorry for my zeal..."EDUCATION" not "EUDCATION."

SP mom, what "music opportunities" are there in the area? I know that there are many town-run athletic programs, but am unaware of similar music, particularly instrumental music "opportunities."

Could you explain your arithmetic here?

1) If the first step to fixing the fiscal problems is capping superintendent pay -- According to the numbers here on Patch, Dr Hayes is paid about $178K/yr, and the budget for next year is about $79 million, so her salary is about 2/10 of a percent of the total budget by my calculations. Even if she worked for free, the impact would be essentially non-existent. The phrase 'a spit in the ocean' comes to mind.

2) If 73% of the budget is going toward staff salaries/benefits, isn't that by definition funding education? What do you consider paying for education if it's not the salaries of educators?

Wow. This last reply has me not Holden MaGroin.

So Mr. Gaynor (if that's your real name)... it's ok if a couple of kids can't do these extracurricular activities because of $$ so you can pay less taxes, but just don't stop paying for private school busses?

Last I checked, there's no robots in the schools. That 73% of the budget that you say is NOT going to education is paying the people who do the educating. Maybe in the schools you attended or you send your kids to there is a vow of poverty being taken by the teachers, but I haven't seen or heard of one anywhere else.

I'm not here to defend the teachers, but I will point out what I see as hypocracy. What I'm hearing is...."reduce my taxes, keep charging for anything you can, and even though I have a good public option, I CHOOSE TO GO SOMEWHERE ELSE SO PAY ME FROM THE BUDGET THAT I'M GOING TO VOTE AGAINST BECAUSE I THINK THE LAW SAYS I HAVE TO KEEP GETTING MY CHECKS. LET THEM CUT OTHER STUFF TO FIND THE $$ FOR ME.

How Christian of you and Liza.

Holden,
A couple of points
1) When a parent chooses to send a child to a non public school, it is a “savings“ for the public school system. Given the cost of $12K per student, which I do believe excludes teachers benefits, from an economic point it’s a great trade for the taxpayers of Scotch Plains, i.e. pay $1,000 per student (books and transportation) and save 12K+.
2) I believe that there are about 300 Scotch Plains children in non-public funded schools now. Just think how detrimental to the schools it would be if these children came back into the system without any additional taxes. For support on this please review Mayor Malool comment in Shackamaxom Patch article which assumes some level of additional tax revenue http://scotchplains.patch.com/articles/despite-clubs-announced-sale-shack-resolution-remains-on-track
3) After conversations with the state official responsible for oversight of the transportation issue, he concurs that it is the law. If you disagree with the law, please elect representatives at the state level that will change the law. I plan to support official who support a voucher system. God bless America!

I'm Holden MaGroin. To Tommy- so if 5 kids come back to the public school it would add $48,000? do you really believe that? What would those 5 kids need that would add that? The kids are spread out between 13 grades. Losing there buses or the check wouldn't make them come back. And according to Liza even if it did, it would be part of living in the real world.

Is the state official that had the conversations a judge? I doubt that this issue is over at the state level. Just because the governor wants charters and tax breaks for private school scholarships doesn't make it a law yet.

Holden...
clearly 5 kids returning to public school will not add $48K, however, every child that returns will be an additional cost with NO additional funds. If enough return, then yes.. it could cost the district more dollars as teachers would need to be hired, or classes would have to get larger. Even if all 300 return... there will just be 300 more students in the district, with NO additional funds. The nonpublic families already give all their funding to the district.

I'm Holden MaGroin. To RU.....it would be a cost less than $1,000. And it is also a choice that they made.

How's this? Before Mayor Marks took away the garbage collection, the town paid for it through our taxes. It came from ABC company. Well I don't like the owner of ABC company because I think he's a godless heathen. I want my refuse picked up by my god fearing friend's company xyz. If I choose to go with xyz to perform the same service that ABC performs, should you give me money to do that?

Holden, My garbage pick up is much better now, other than the loss of the tax write-off I am pretty happy since it went private and I would probably pay for private garbage collection if the garbage was be disposed of in a improper way. I also would not use that analogy because I don't equate the ability to choose garbage pick up with the ability to choose who and how my children are educated.

To Tommy. So the public schools educate in an improper way? Based on what facts? That is an opinion. One that anyone is entitled to. But our schools are not failing. No where near that. So to choose to not go, is a choice made not for educational reasons but some other. Why should I pay for any of that choice?
I don't see the analogy as improper as long as you are treating each thing as a service. If the service that is being provided meets the accepted criteria which our schools do and in fact well exceed, then the reason for not going is not because it's a failing school.
You also didn't answer my question, should you pay for my garbage pickup if I don't like the public garbage pickup owner or the way their trucks looked and decided to go with a different company? My decision after all would be based on my beliefs.

Holden, In no way was i making a statement that public schools educate in an improper way.. I was just try to think of something when I would choose a different garbage service other than the towns service. Secondly there are a number of choices in public schools that are not made for educational reasons i.e. extra curricular activities where you are asking taxpayer to pay for those choices. Where we differ is acceptable criteria, you believe it is acceptable and are willing to use economic coercion to force the issue. Third I don't believe that I should pay for your garbage pickup but i should not have to pay for extra curricular activities either.

I'm Holden MaGroin. Well Tommy Taxpayer those were your words about improper service not mine.
I'll let you off the hook and keep paying for my own garbage, and if you don't want to pay for the schools extracurricular activities, why are you so insistent that I pay for your bus or that check you get? I know, it's the law so you believe. Isn't it being challenged by some schools in NJ? Let's wait and see.
By the way, you commented below about thinking you won an argument. I'll repeat myself again and tell you I'm more interested in giving an opinion. But I must share with you that my friend Bigby Hind just called me and she says I definetly won this one.

I'm Holdem MaGroin. To Liza. My point was the "tough luck to the kids, its the real world" comment you made. There is a real world option for these families. They choose to not take it. My being Christian comment had nothing to do with public education but had to do with attitude.

Machiavelli, I am an MBA with more than an elementary knowledge of economics. First it seems that economies of scale never seem to happen in the public sector. Second there are fixed cost and variable cost that even those with a elementary knowledge of economics understands. If you are telling me that variable cost are a $1,000, I would disagree with you, I know that activities fees in non public schools range from 300 to 900 regardless of participation, and that is market based. Third please review the Malool article about Shack and the detriment to the school if "Shack" had 300 additional students coming into the system, which happens to be an approximate amount to non public kids. Her statement also include some offset of additional tax revenue which would not happen if the non public school children can back into "the system".
Holden, as a we know the execute branch is responsible to enforce the laws so I would say that until a judge decrees otherwise, I think I win that argument.....

I'm Holden MaGroin. To Tommy, you remind me of my namesake. He's my uncle Holden MaShillelagh. When he is confronted with an opinion different from his, he just says I don't believe you.

I'm glad you believe that Mayor Malool is such an expert on school finances. This is the same mayor that hired someone last year to help her make decisions on what to cut because the school budget is so different from the town budget.

I'm not here to win an argument. Just want to state opinions. My opinion is that you, Sean Gaynor and Liza send your kids to religious school. I think that's great. I also think that is your choice. I believe taxes should support public schools because they have to take and educate everyone. If you choose not to go there, I support that right. I don't support that you most likely vote no on a school budget because you chose not to get any benefit from it but you would still keep your hand out for that check every year for the busses.

Tom

Unfortunately it is difficult to compare all the school districts apples to apples as some include expenses that others do not... Also i believe the per student costs do not include teacher and administration benefits and pension costs. Creative accountin skews the true costs.

Kudos to Mr. Russo for being able to express many of my thoughts so succinctly. Notwithstanding the ultimate disposition of the activity fee, I truly believe the BOE has made a good-faith effort to balance tax relief and equity for everyone with a stake in the school system. And BOE Member Parisi is correct in emphasizing this year's spending plan as a value proposition.

That said, it is also important to recognize that without structural change - much of which is beyond the control of the Board - it will be very difficult to hold the line on operating expenses (and the levy) next year.

And finally, a reminder that the full legislature (Assembly and Senate) is up for reelection this year. Whatever your opinions, now is the time to express them and hold your representatives accountable.

Tom, would you then agree that cost per student is $14,316. My calculation is $80,158,048 total expenditures with 5599 students.

Liza, maybe I can help. With thanks to Tommy Taxpayer for providing the link below, let's look at what some of the costs are related to.
http://spfk12.org/USERFR_rev.HTM
The figures are from the report and I shortened them into (000's)
I'm showing expenses that may not be included in some private school budgets, or would be paid for by tax dollars or donations.

Revenue 80,158
Spec ed 4,975
Basic skills 820
tuition 7,311
speech/ot/pt 1,767
child study 1,344
transport 3,217
charter 47
non public programs 395 ($ sent from the school budget to local private schools)
IDEA title 1 975
debt 2,344 (this is principle/interest for building expansion voted in 2001)
Total 23,195
Balance 56,963
divide by 116 (this is the number the link says are out of district)
remaining students 5,483
cost per remaining students $10,389

I had to guess on some of the appropriation lines. The figures could include some more money that could come off the total but I didn't want to exaggerate the total.

So yes Liza the numbers are high, but they include some costs that public schools bear that others may not.

I don't know if a complete overhaul is required. Maybe just a more deep dive into what the numbers are made up of.

RU, I don't think it's entirely accurate. I did some lumping, like the debt associated with prior voter approvals for bonds. That has nothing to do with regular ed or special ed students. It also does not really factor into educating a child beyond the need for space 10 years ago. Also, there are over 700 students designated special ed that are not out of district. I'm sure they are receiving support from some of the line items that I included.

My intent is to NOT turn this into a war between regular and special education students or families. It is to point out that when a number of over $14k is posted and then reacted to, I thought it may be helpful to look further at some of the public school requirements.

aristotle.. regardless of how anyone looks at it.. I believe the taxpayers in this state.. not just SPF.. have had it. Education is starting to take on an entitlement attitude.. and not in a healthy way. Schools do want to do the best for their students and I completely agree with that. But at some point there has to be a line drawn. Schools cannot be all things to all students, and I feel that is what is happening. Schools have become the only place where the child can get music appreciation.. sports.. counseling..art classes..and name any other of the myriad offerings that are in schools today. What happend to Free Appropriate Public Education? That is what the state and districts are supposed to provide. And yes.. i know a lot of the money goes to the teachers and benefits and pensions.. but again.. how much can the taxpayers bear? It saddens me deeply as i know i will not be staying here much longer. We wont be able to afford it. What is worse.. is the incredibly high taxes are eroding my home value as we speak. And i know this for sure as i just had it evaluated by a realtor. Rock/me/Hard place.

SP mom.. perhaps this is the policy.. but it is not the practice. I know several district students not attending the high school that were turned away from programs for a variety of ridiculous reasons.

oddly enough.. it was the hocky team that would not allow a student to play 4 years ago!

I am not disagreeing with you. In fact, I think removing the activity fee was a big mistake, as I mentioned in other postings. I think the fact that we receive the amount of opportunities we do for a little as $100 per year is quite a bargain! I pay more than that in a month for my son to take music lessons. My point was to those who argue that those who send their children to non-public should not have to pay for "my activities". They are there for the taking.

Tom
you hit on my points exactly. When a town is consistently losing empty nesters due to the inaffordability of the area.. it just brings on very crowded schools. In a perfect world, we would have retirees that could stay in the area.. supporting the schools without using them. Now.. we have retirees moving out of towns with the homes being replaced almost immediately with families with children... taxpayers using the system. I do believe in quality education for all students. I just think the schools need to be more fiscally responsible so as each family graduates their last child.. they do not automatically have to call a realtor to relocate....out of the state. Yea.. sadly that is what we are planning too.

RUkiddingme & Mr. Russo:

When I heard that we were only going to have a $53 dollar increase I was relived. Then when I heard that the number after the fact was raised to $64 I felt stabbed in the back to some degree. Then when I further heard that it was for reimbursement for Activity Fee’s I was very disappointed and could see that a vocal minority of tax payers were possibly listened too.

Mr. Russo said that the over all housing market has more to do with the eroding house values. This is possible, but the property tax does enter into the calculations for a mortgage. The bigger the property tax number, the larger the monthly payment, the less buyers that can afford to move into this community. That is less competition.

Mr. Russo you mentioned that you used the schools and now you have to move when you retire. Well, welcome to the club. Your actions on the school board did not help the situation.

All this was done with total disregard to the empty nesters mentioned by RUkiddingme. In addition, there are some of us that have never used the school system and have been the deep pockets for cash as well to support the school system.

We have also come to the decision, that due to the property taxes that we will be joining you and RUkiddingme in moving out of town. This may be even before retirement, due to job loss.

It was not the extra $11 dollars, but the thousands that I pay a year for which I have not received any thing in return.

Mr. Russo:

It will be interesting to see, if when you put the last box in your car, close the door and look in your review mirror for the last time at your former house in Scotch Plains you will still have no regrets.

Were do plan on heading? I would stay away from there, in fear that you will bring the attitude that contributed to "strip mining" of Scotch Plains and helped destroy it as a place I hoped that I would never have to leave. Property taxes, made up mostly of the school budget, has changed that for good.

Good luck when you leave, I just hope you are not moving to the same place as I intend to move too.

SP mom.. you do realize that when the SPHO household- with no children - leaves.. it will probalbly be replaced by a family with children... you add to the costs of education without adding any more funds.....These are the households the community should be trying to keep....It is simple accounting.

SP Mom:

It is very disappointing to hear you say “Can I help you pack? “ which shows a lack of compassion or gratitude for some one who has paid ten’s of thousands of dollars to educate your children and have received no return on that investment. I hope that your children do not share these traits of yours, our town, state and country needs better.

SP HomeOwner: Your comments are normally on topic and written without being personal. I too believe your posting about Mr. Russo was mean-spirited and crossed the line. Education in NJ has not come cheaply. The way in which it is funded has penalized communities like ours for a long time by relying on local property taxes for the majority of the financial support.
I believe that during Mr. Russo's 10 years on the board, the school costs have not risen any faster than most other districts within our state. Last year during this time, you made a call on this forum for new candidates to come forward for BOE and council positions.
After your unprovoked verbal attack on Mr. Russo, who in their right mind would want to subject themselves to that kind of personal assault? Further, Mr. Russo was honored a few years back as "volunteer of the year" for his time on the BOE, Rotary, scholarship foundation, and some other town service organizations that I can't recall.
I don't think we should be personally attacking people like this, but encouraging this type of involvement in our communities.

SP mom -- The only rude comments I've read on this site are yours.

Liza: I have a couple of comments to your posts.
1. Do you know what is in the BOE budget? By that I mean are you aware of academic programs, clubs, activities, facilities, and staffing levels? Are you familiar with state-mandated requirements and tuition levels for the students who go out of district? I wasn't until a few years ago when I attended the budget presentations and asked specific questions on these items. It has given me more clarity on some of their spending and has made the budget more than just a number.
2. Have you seen the Patch article on the Westfield budget? Not only are they asking for the full 2% increase from the taxpayers, they are requesting a waiver of over $300k more to raise taxes above this 2%.
3. With the school taxes going down over $2M, why aren't you screaming at council meetings for a more interested look at mergers? If our towns were merged, both communities would be seeing a reduction in school taxes versus the current scenario where Fanwood sees a decrease and SP sees an increase.

It looks to me that the BOE has reduced spending and passed along state aid for tax relief. Yet due to some formula by the state, one community will have a tax increase. This could be avoided if the 2 councils gave more than passing lip-service to the consolidation study that's been floating out there for a year. THAT would provide you some of the relief that you're requesting.

Liza: Your statement:
"After reading all the comments left over the weekend, my only comment is the BOE, school administration and teachers have to finally accept that the majority of SP residents do not have any additional money to throw into their coffers. Most of the people I know haven't gotten a raise in more than 2 years but everythng else, especially property taxes, have soared." implies that the BOE, school admin. and teachers haven't accepted the new fiscal reality. But, in fact, they have. Here in SPF, the BOE's members have produced a fiscally responsible budget, the teachers have accepted a contract that provides very low increases and higher contributions to benefits, and the admins. have not accepted pay raises. What more can we ask of them? Remember, these BOE members, admins and teachers are our neighbors, too, who are struggling, just as we are, with rising taxes and the cost of living. Implying that they are not struggling with the rest of us is not acknowledging the concessions they have made. To answer your question, "Is anyone listening?" the answer is a clear, "Yes!".

From what we're told each year, the local tax support of the schools is based on the value of each community. That value is determined by the state. Some years SP has increased in value faster than Fanwood, other years it's been the opposite.

I'm not saying overall school taxes would go up or down based on a merger. I'm saying that each community would have the same proportional increase/decrease each year and we wouldn't have these swings where one town gets hit disproportionately harder than the other.

This year it's even high-lighted more so than in the past. With a decrease in the overall school tax, SP will still see an increase because the state has determined that SP has gained more value this past year relative to Fanwood.

As far as reassessments, the overall school budget won't change. It's just a matter of how it's paid. If the relative value of a house in SP compared to Fanwood is already in existence, then I would believe that a reassessment would only happen for reasons of structural improvement.

These attorneys who advertise that you should have your home reassessed because you're paying too much in taxes will just be causing a full town reassessment sooner rather than later. The town/county/BOE budgets are paid for by the taxpayers. If you get your assessment reduced, that doesn't mean the budget goes down, it just means some other house will ultimately pay more.

Liza: I thought that Fanwood took a larger piece of the tax increase last year. This is from the Patch last year at this time.

http://scotchplains.patch.com/articles/2010-2011-school-budget-election-guide

Based on the avg Fanwood home assessed at $84,600, the tax increase would be $439.
Based on the avg SP home assessed at $122,400, the tax increase would be $299.

I'm not looking to pick a fight, but if your increase was $514 (if that was only the school piece and didn't include the town and county), then your home is valued above the average.
Either way, Fanwood paid alot more last year relative to their assessed value.

I think this further supports my point in the ludicrousness of our towns being separate.

Would someone clarify the 1.5% health insurance contribution for me? I understood it to be 1.5% of salary towards health insurance costs, for a $100K salary that would be about 8% or 9%, not 1.5% of the health insurance costs. Which is it?

RU- You're incorrect. The 1.5% is based on their gross salary. The employee making $60k pays $900/year. If the avg policy is worth the $20k/year you're using as an example (I think that is high), the $60k per year employee pays 4.5% of the policy cost. The employee making $100k/year pays $1,500 or 7.5% of the policy cost in your example.